Lott v. State

<p>1. —Local Option—Statement of Facts—Certiorari.</p> <p>Where, upon appeal from a conviction of a violation of the local option law, the case was affirmed for the want of a statement of facts, and it appearing upon motion for rehearing that a statement of facts was filed in the case in due time, but left out of the record inadvertently, a writ of certiorari was grante'd to correct the record and the affirmance set aside.</p> <p>2. —Same—Charge of Court—Principals—Misdemeanor.</p> <p>In misdemeanor cases the distinction between principals and accomplices, made in felony cases, does not apply; and where the court instructed the jury, upon trial of a violation of the local option law, that it was not necessary for the defendant to have been bodily present when the offense was committed, there was no error. Following Houston v. State, 13 Texas Crim. App., 595.</p> <p>3. —Same—Evidence—Arrest—Confessions—Bill of Exceptions.</p> <p>Where, upon appeal from a violation of the local option law, it did not appear that defendant was under arrest when he made certain declarations to the county attorney, and the objection to the testimony was that the declarations were not a voluntary confession, the same could not be considered. ■</p>